How Christ transgressed the law, but without sin
Dec 28, 2013 3:31:15 GMT
Post by Colossians on Dec 28, 2013 3:31:15 GMT
This material is for the teaching of the Body of Christ, however the author reserves copyright over it.
_____________________________________________________
HOW CHRIST TRANSGRESSED THE LAW, BUT WITHOUT SIN
The modern Western idea of law is a fluffy one: laws come and go, are appended to, are amended, and are merged with grace.
Ancient law was a different kettle of fish. For example, Moses declared in the law at Deut 4:2 that every bit of it must be kept and none of it changed.
And in the time of Esther, her husband king Ahaseurus, ruler over 127 provinces which ranged from India to Ethiopia, couldn't negate the law which Haman, his second-in-command, had tricked him into decreeing against the Jews. Rather, he had to make another law which gave the Jews the power to defend themselves against the first law. (See Es 3:8-14, 8:8-13.)
The chief characteristic then that the modern Christian doesn't really understand (even though he experiences it with things like parking fines and the taxation office) is that it doesn't matter what your intent is: if you've transgressed what the law says (if you've transgressed the particular words in a law), then you have indeed transgressed the law.
The first commandment in the decalogue states that no-one was to have any gods before God. Necessarily included in this is the prohibition against declaring oneself to be God. When Christ declared in faith that He was God, He therefore broke the law. It doesn't matter that He was in fact God: He broke the law. One can argue till one is blue in the face that Christ was allowed to declare He was God because He was in fact God, but the law won't hear you: anyone under the law who declares himself to be God, breaks the law.
Once again and with emphasis: anyone under the law who declares himself to be God, breaks the law.
So we see then just why Gal 3:12 declares: "the law is not of faith": He who walked by nothing but faith, was according to law, correctly condemned by the law.
This then leads us to address a common complementary error in the church today: the idea that when John says to the churches: "sin is the transgression of the law" (1 John 3:4), he is speaking of the decalogue.
He is not.
Rather, he is speaking of that to which Paul was (also) referring at Rom 3:27 with his “the law of faith”, which he (John) accordingly particularises only a few verses later as:
"And this is His commandment, That we should believe on the name of His Son Jesus Christ, and love one another, as He gave us commandment" 1 John 3:23,
which 'law' is synonymous with "the law of Christ" (Gal 6:2) and "the law of liberty" (James 2:12), the apparent oxymoronic force of all 3 expressions (particularly the third) consisting in the fact that the word “law” is almost invariably upon initial considerations taken to be referring to that which sends people to gaol, rather than a principle, which (latter) it actually refers to here (in these 3 expressions at 1 John 3:23, Gal 6:2 and James 2:12).
So then that is how Christ transgressed the law without sin: He walked in faith. And thus He showed that the law is redundant to all who walk by the Spirit.
And so Paul tells us:
"But now we are delivered from the law, that being dead wherein we were held; that we should serve in newness of spirit, and not in the oldness of the letter" Rom 6:7.
But the foundational point is that which needs to be understood by everyone and which is hardly understood by anyone: the assessment as to whether one has broken the law, is purely a technical one, based on the letter and only the letter.
Christ transgressed the law, but without sin. The lesson is therefore clear: the law has only one utility in the life of the Christian: it shows him that his own efforts are of no value to God.
We therefore praise God that the born-again experience of the Christian is a supernatural one, not energised or implemented by himself: not even assisted. And so neither, therefore, should the works which emanate from that conversion. That is, the works which occur in the life of a Christian are to be every bit as involuntary and every bit as spontaneous as his initial conversion.
For it is only the works of the Holy Spirit in the Christian, which will follow the Christian into eternity.
Thus:
"For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ. Now if any man build upon this foundation gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, stubble; Every man's work shall be made manifest: for the day shall declare it, because it shall be revealed by fire; and the fire shall try every man's work of what sort it is. If any man's work abide which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive a reward. If any man's work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire" 1 Cor 3:11-15.
Amen.
_____________________________________________________
HOW CHRIST TRANSGRESSED THE LAW, BUT WITHOUT SIN
The modern Western idea of law is a fluffy one: laws come and go, are appended to, are amended, and are merged with grace.
Ancient law was a different kettle of fish. For example, Moses declared in the law at Deut 4:2 that every bit of it must be kept and none of it changed.
And in the time of Esther, her husband king Ahaseurus, ruler over 127 provinces which ranged from India to Ethiopia, couldn't negate the law which Haman, his second-in-command, had tricked him into decreeing against the Jews. Rather, he had to make another law which gave the Jews the power to defend themselves against the first law. (See Es 3:8-14, 8:8-13.)
The chief characteristic then that the modern Christian doesn't really understand (even though he experiences it with things like parking fines and the taxation office) is that it doesn't matter what your intent is: if you've transgressed what the law says (if you've transgressed the particular words in a law), then you have indeed transgressed the law.
The first commandment in the decalogue states that no-one was to have any gods before God. Necessarily included in this is the prohibition against declaring oneself to be God. When Christ declared in faith that He was God, He therefore broke the law. It doesn't matter that He was in fact God: He broke the law. One can argue till one is blue in the face that Christ was allowed to declare He was God because He was in fact God, but the law won't hear you: anyone under the law who declares himself to be God, breaks the law.
Once again and with emphasis: anyone under the law who declares himself to be God, breaks the law.
So we see then just why Gal 3:12 declares: "the law is not of faith": He who walked by nothing but faith, was according to law, correctly condemned by the law.
This then leads us to address a common complementary error in the church today: the idea that when John says to the churches: "sin is the transgression of the law" (1 John 3:4), he is speaking of the decalogue.
He is not.
Rather, he is speaking of that to which Paul was (also) referring at Rom 3:27 with his “the law of faith”, which he (John) accordingly particularises only a few verses later as:
"And this is His commandment, That we should believe on the name of His Son Jesus Christ, and love one another, as He gave us commandment" 1 John 3:23,
which 'law' is synonymous with "the law of Christ" (Gal 6:2) and "the law of liberty" (James 2:12), the apparent oxymoronic force of all 3 expressions (particularly the third) consisting in the fact that the word “law” is almost invariably upon initial considerations taken to be referring to that which sends people to gaol, rather than a principle, which (latter) it actually refers to here (in these 3 expressions at 1 John 3:23, Gal 6:2 and James 2:12).
So then that is how Christ transgressed the law without sin: He walked in faith. And thus He showed that the law is redundant to all who walk by the Spirit.
And so Paul tells us:
"But now we are delivered from the law, that being dead wherein we were held; that we should serve in newness of spirit, and not in the oldness of the letter" Rom 6:7.
But the foundational point is that which needs to be understood by everyone and which is hardly understood by anyone: the assessment as to whether one has broken the law, is purely a technical one, based on the letter and only the letter.
Christ transgressed the law, but without sin. The lesson is therefore clear: the law has only one utility in the life of the Christian: it shows him that his own efforts are of no value to God.
We therefore praise God that the born-again experience of the Christian is a supernatural one, not energised or implemented by himself: not even assisted. And so neither, therefore, should the works which emanate from that conversion. That is, the works which occur in the life of a Christian are to be every bit as involuntary and every bit as spontaneous as his initial conversion.
For it is only the works of the Holy Spirit in the Christian, which will follow the Christian into eternity.
Thus:
"For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ. Now if any man build upon this foundation gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, stubble; Every man's work shall be made manifest: for the day shall declare it, because it shall be revealed by fire; and the fire shall try every man's work of what sort it is. If any man's work abide which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive a reward. If any man's work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire" 1 Cor 3:11-15.
Amen.